‘Liebe bis in den Tod’ by Barbara Bronnen

Emmanuel and Käthe Forster married shortly after the Second World War. After about twenty happy years of marriage, Käthe was diagnosed with rheumatism. Other illnesses followed, which caused her increasing pain. In addition, her face was disfigured by a skin disease, she was treated with medication for depression and was finally completely dependent on her husband’s self-sacrificing care. But he himself increasingly reached the limits of what was bearable and even suffered several heart attacks, which threatened to leave his wife suddenly alone and helpless. After Käthe had already tried to kill herself several times in vain, she asked her husband to help her die. After sixty years of marriage, the couple decided to take their own lives together, keeping their plan hidden from everyone, including their children, with whom their relationship had been strained since Käthe's illnesses. Forster killed his wife with a shot to the head, but then panicked and did not manage to shoot himself afterwards. He was charged and had to stand trial for manslaughter. Judge Anselm Joos, however, decided to charge him with killing on demand and reduced culpability, and acquitted him with a suspended sentence. This is where the novel begins. But even though the trial is over at this point, it is still a courtroom novel, because the two first-person narrators, namely Forster and Judge Joos, recall the trial and the events connected with it in mostly alternating chapters. Forster gives insights into his life with his wife and into his motivation to help her die, the judge makes his judgement transparent to the readers.

Barbara Bronnen's novel was written at a time when assisted dying was not readily accessible in Germany. The author reflects this in the world of the novel, where Forster is forced to resort to an unlawful act to assist his wife in her desired death. The novel does not give simple answers, but rather raises questions of moral and legal culpability and highlights ethical dilemmas, which is already indicated by its epigraph: ‘Terrible is the Temptation to do Good‘ (Bertolt Brecht). Forster makes clear how much his wife suffered and wished for her death. His dilemma was that he would be blamable in any case: if he complied with her death wish, he would be guilty of killing her; if he did not help her, he would be responsible for her continued suffering. This dilemma is also recognised by Judge Joos, who does not want to judge according to the usual scheme of legal facts and guilt, but wants to appreciate the case in its exceptionality, also against the background of his own biographical history that influences his lenient sentence. The novel also illuminates the ambivalence of the killing by having Forster as well as readers question his motivation after the verdict: did he really do it only for her, or not also for himself, as he was overburdened by caring for her? Was his pity, which is usually considered a noble motivation for killing on demand, perhaps more self-pity? In any case, the novel highlights the problem that a lack of familial and social support for couples in the event of illness can lead to situations of extreme vulnerability, from which they see no way out other than taking their own lives. Furthermore, Judge Joos's opinion suggests that more liberal assisted dying legislation could have offered the couple—or at least Käthe—a gentler death, and might even have had a suicide-preventive effect by allowing open conversations with third parties.